Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 13:39:29 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199710161839.NAA10955@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: John Cowan Sender: Lojban list From: John Cowan Organization: Lojban Peripheral Subject: Re: Problems with Abstraction X-To: Lojban List To: John Cowan X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 599 X-From-Space-Date: Thu Oct 16 13:39:39 1997 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU Lee Daniel Crocker (none) wrote: > The refgram makes sense and is reasonably clear on this point, but I > do see {ka} and {ni} used (by myself, too) as if there were a semi- > implied {ce'u} or {makau} in the first omitted place. Perfectly OK. An omitted place means whatever the speaker intends it to mean, and if the intent is to mean "ce'u", then that's what it means. "ce'u" was put into the language to allow the existing usage (omitted place) to be made explicit. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org e'osai ko sarji la lojban